CLE Midterm Exam May 2020

What is A system, using means and methods allowed by law and approved by the parties, for
Alternative the purpose of resolving or facilitating the resolution of disputes and controversies
Dispute between them, in an expeditious and speedy manner, without resorting to court
Resolution? adjudication.

Forms of ADR 1. ARBITRATION

2. MEDIATION
3. CONCILIATION
4. NEUTRAL AND EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION
5. MINI-TRIAL
6. ANY COMBINATION OF THE FOREGOING
ANY OTHER ADR FORM (INNOMINATE ADR FORM)
What is A voluntary process in which a mediator, selected by the disputing parties, facilitates
Mediation (RA communication and negotiation, and assists the parties in reaching a voluntary
9285)? agreement regarding a dispute.
(Sec. 3[q] , RA 9285)

Classification 1. INSTITUTIONAL
of Mediation • When administered by, and conducted under the rules of mediation of such
institution.
• An agreement to submit a dispute to mediation by this type shall include the
following agreements:
• To be bound by the internal mediation and administrative policies of
such institution
• To have such rules govern the mediation of the dispute and for the
mediator, the parties and their respective counsels and non-party
participants to abide by such rules.
2. AD HOC
• one where the parameters of the mediation set by the parties are only for the
particular dispute

Characteristic 1. Place of Mediation may be the subject of agreement.

s of mediation 2. Assistance of lawyers or non-parties is allowed but may also be waived in
writing but such waiver may be rescinded at any time.
3. Agreement by parties to institutional mediation necessarily includes an
agreement that the parties, the mediator, their lawyers or nonparty participant
are bound by the internal rules and administrative policies of the mediation
institution. Should there be a conflict between the institution’s rules and RA
9285, the latter shall prevail.
4. Information obtained through mediation which would otherwise not have been
subject to the modes of discovery sanctioned by rules of procedure is
considered privileged and confidential and cannot be introduced as evidence.
There are exceptions to the privilege in RA 9285 as enumerated under Section
11 thereof.
5. If settlement is reached during mediation, parties prepare settlement
agreement, with assistance of their respective counsel and of mediator. The
 mediator certifies that the terms of the agreement has been adequately
explained to the parties in a language know to them. If parties agree, they may
be deposited with the “appropriate Clerk of the Regional Trial Court” of the
place where any one of the parties reside. Should there be a need to invoke the
power of the courts to enforce the agreement, a petition may be filed in that
court, which shall proceed summarily to hear the petition.
Cases covered 1. All civil cases, settlement of estates and cases covered by the Rule on Summary
Procedure. Typical cases would be collection of debts, ejectment of tenants in
apartment dwellings, and inheritance disputes among family members.
2. Cases cognizable by the Lupong Tagapamayapa under the Katarungang
Pambarangay Law such as disputes between neighbors of the same barangay
over property.
3. The civil aspect of Batas Pambansa 22, which covers the debts paid through
bouncing checks.
4. The civil aspect of quasi-offenses under negligence like motor vehicle
accidents that has damaged the vehicle or injured passengers or pedestrians.
Cases not 1. Labor disputes covered by Presidential Decree No. 442 (The Labor Code of the
covered Philippines, as amended, and its Implementing Rules and Regulations);
2. The civil status of persons;
3. The validity of marriage;
4. Any ground for legal separation;
5. The jurisdiction of courts;
6. Future legitime;
7. Criminal liability;
8. Those which by law cannot be compromised; and
9. Disputes referred to court-annexed mediation.
What is Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) is another innovation in the Philippine court system.
Judicial When court-annexed mediation fails, the case is brought to the judge who then acts as
Dispute a conciliator, a neutral evaluator and a mediator. The judge will try to mediate the case.
Resolution? If the judge’s intervention as a mediator succeeds, the case is concluded with a
judgment based on a compromise. If the dispute is still unresolved, then the case is
referred to another judge for trial. Both parties must now be prepared for litigation.

Basic notes in a) The Mediator shall be considered as an officer of the court.

mediation
proceeding b) A conference before the Mediator shall first be held with both parties present. The
mediator shall explain the mediation proceedings stressing the benefits of an early
settlement of the dispute and shall attempt immediate settlement. If no settlement is
reached at this conference, the Mediator may, with the consent of both parties, hold
separate caucuses with each party to enable the Mediator to determine their
respective real interests in the dispute. Thereafter, another joint conference may be
held to consider various options proposed by the parties to the Mediator to resolve the
disputes.

c) The Mediator shall not record the proceedings in any manner, but he may take down
personal notes to guide him.

d) The Mediator shall submit to the trial court, which referred the case to mediation, a
 status report on the progress of the proceedings at the end of the mediation period.

e) The PMC shall not keep a file of mediation proceedings except the report of the
Mediator. All other records or documents that have been submitted by the parties shall
be returned to them.

f) At the end of the thirty-day period allowed by the trial court, if no settlement has
been reached, the case must be returned to the trial court for further proceedings,
unless the parties agree to further continue the mediation, in which case a last
extension of thirty (30) days may be granted by the trial court.

The mediation proceedings and all incidents thereto shall be kept strictly confidential,
unless otherwise specifically provided by law, and all admissions or statements made
therein shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.

Basic ethical a. A Mediator shall be candid, accurate, and fully responsible to the trial court
principle concerning his qualifications, availability, and all other pertinent matters. A Mediator
applicable to shall observe all administrative policies, applicable procedural rules, and statutes. A
all mediator Mediator is responsible to the judiciary for the propriety of his activities and must
observe judicial standards of fidelity and diligence.

b. Impartiality. The Mediator shall maintain impartiality toward all parties. Impartiality
means freedom from favoritism or bias either by appearance, word or by action, and a
commitment to serve all parties as opposed to a single party. No time may a Mediator
meet with any of the parties to discuss a case referred.

c. Competence. - A mediator shall maintain professional competence in mediation

skills, including but not limited to: staying informed of and abiding by all statutes, rules,
and administrative orders relevant to the practice of mediation;and regularly engaging
in educational activities promoting professional growth.

d. Conflict of Interest. The Mediator shall refrain from participating in the mediation of
any dispute if he/she perceives that participation, as a Mediator will be a clear conflict
of interest.

e. Avoidance of Delays. A Mediator shall plan a work schedule, refrain from accepting
appointments when it becomes apparent that completion of the mediation
assignments cannot be done in a timely and expeditious manner, and perform the
mediation services in such a way as to avoid delays.

f. Prohibition Against Solicitation or Advertising. A Mediator shall not use, the

mediation process to solicit, encourage, or otherwise incur future professional services
and financial gain from either or both parties.

g. Prohibition Against Coercion. A Mediator shall not coerce or unfairly influence a

party into a settlement agreement and shall not make substantive decisions for any
party to a mediation process.

h. Prohibition Against Misrepresentation. A Mediator shall not intentionally or

 knowingly misrepresent material facts or circumstances in the course of conducting a
mediation.

i. A Balanced Process. A Mediator shall promote a balanced process and shall

encourage the parties to conduct the mediation deliberations in a non-adversarial
manner.

j. Mutual Respect. A Mediator shall promote mutual respect among the parties
throughout the mediation process.

k. Personal Opinion. While a Mediator may point out possible outcomes of the case,
under no circumstance may a Mediator offer a personal or professional opinion as to
how the trial court, where the case has been filed, will resolve the dispute.

l. Disclosure of Fees. Except for his/her authorized fees, the Mediator in Court-Referred
Mediation shall not accept any commission, gift or other similar forms or remuneration
from parties or their representatives.

m. Confidentiality. The Mediator shall treat information revealed in mediation in strict

confidentiality, except for the following: (1) Information that is statutorily mandated to
be reported; (2) Information that, in the judgment of the Mediator reveals a danger of
serious physical harm either to a third person or to himself/herself.

n. Role of Mediator in Settlement. The Mediator has the responsibility to see to it that
the parties consider and understand the terms of the settlement.

o. The Mediator shall respect the relationship between mediation and other
professional disciplines including law, medicine, science, accounting, mental health and
social services and shall promote harmony and cooperation between Mediators and
other professionals.

p. Pro Bono Service. A Mediator has a professional responsibility to provide competent

service to persons seeking assistance including those unable to pay for such services. As
a means of meeting the needs of the financially disadvantaged, a Mediator should
provide mediation services pro bono or at a reduced rate of compensation.

The three The Guidelines define three stages of court diversion, namely: Court Annexed
stages of Mediation (CAM), Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) and Appeals Court Mediation
diversion (ACM).  Each was previously covered by a separate Supreme Court issuance, which
somehow made it difficult to see that they were meant to complement each other.  The
Guidelines now clarify that CAM, JDR and ACM have the same objective and that they
are merely different stages of a comprehensive dispute resolution process aimed at
abating or ending court-docket congestion.

1.  During CAM, the first stage of court diversion, the judge refers the parties to the
Philippine Mediation Center (PMC) for the mediation of their dispute by trained and
accredited mediators.

2.  If CAM fails, the second stage, called the JDR, is undertaken by the JDR judge, acting
 as a mediator-conciliator-early neutral evaluator.

3.  The third stage is during appeal, where covered cases are referred to ACM.

Expanded In addition to consolidating the existing CAM and JDR rules, the Guidelines covers the
jurisdiction civil aspect of less grave felonies punishable by correctional penalties not exceeding six
years imprisonment, where the offended party is a private person.[2]

The purpose is for the court diversion process to achieve a greater impact.  The
expansion to less grave offenses is needed since civil cases constitute only a small 16
percent of all cases filed in court, while special proceedings constitute even a smaller
7.6 percent.  Since correctional penalties are intended for rehabilitation and correction
of the offender, there is no reason why crimes punishable by correctional penalties may
not be compromised, as to their civil aspect.  However, it is not clear if the Guidelines
applies to the civil aspect of criminal cases that are governed by special laws, although
punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six years.  In a strict sense, the term “less
grave felonies” applies to crimes under the Revised Penal Code but not crimes
governed by special laws.

Despite the non-mediatable nature of the principal action, like annulment of marriage,
other issues such as custody of children, support, visitation, property relations and
guardianship may be referred to CAM and JDR to limit the issues for trial.

Mandatory (1) All civil cases and the civil liability of criminal cases covered by the Rule on Summary
Coverage for Procedure, including the civil liability for violation of B.P. 22, except those which by law
Court may not be compromised;
Annexed
Mediation (2) Special proceedings for the settlement of estates;
and Judicial
Dispute (3) All civil and criminal cases filed with a certificate to file action issued by the Punong
Resolution Barangay or the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo under the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law

(4) The civil aspect of Quasi-Offenses under Title 14 of the Revised Penal Code;

(5) The civil aspect of less grave felonies punishable by correctional penalties not
exceeding 6 years imprisonment, where the offended party is a private person;

(6) The civil aspect of estafa, theft and libel;

(7) All civil cases and probate proceedings, testate and intestate, brought on appeal
from the exclusive

The following cases shall not be referred to CAM and JDR:

1. Civil cases which by law cannot be compromised (Article 2035, New Civil Code);
 2. Other criminal cases not covered under paragraphs 3 to 6 above;

3. Habeas Corpus petitions;

4. All cases under Republic Act No. 9262 (Violence against Women and Children); and

5. Cases with pending application for Restraining Orders/Preliminary Injunctions.

However, in cases covered under 1, 4 and 5 where the parties inform the court that
they have agreed to undergo mediation on some aspects thereof, e.g., custody of
minor children, separation of property, or support pendente lite, the court shall refer
them to mediation.

CAM Under the Guidelines, the CAM procedure is:

procedure
Step 1: Filing 1. File a dispute for mediation
a request for
mediation 2. Completely fill out the Request Mediation Form.  You may hand deliver or submit via
facsimile or email.  Please make sure that you fill out all the pertinent information. 

3. Pay the filing fee.

Step 2: Notice The Secretariat shall send a Notice of Mediation to both the complainant and
of mediation respondent indicating the schedule of the preliminary conference.   Should the parties
wish to send a representative; a notarized Special Power of Attorney will be
required.  Please refer to Mediation Forms for details of the Special Power of Attorney.

Step 3: Attend The preliminary conference will be an opportunity for both parties to understand the
the process and guidelines for mediation.
preliminary
conference The NCM shall raffle off the case to a mediator from its roster.  This step will require
parties to agree on the mediator who will handle the case.  Should, for any reason, the
mediator is unable to handle the case, the parties shall each pick three (3) names from
the roster of available mediators.  The common name will be chosen. If no common
name appears, the NCM shall recommend a mediator to be agreed upon by all parties.

Step 4: Sign Parties are given a copy of the Agreement to Mediate for their review.  They shall sign
the the Agreement to Mediate Form to signify their intent to formally enter into the
agreement to mediation process.
mediate form
Step 5: Each mediation session lasts three (3) hours.  Should it run beyond three (3) hours, it
Mediation shall be counted as another mediation session. 
session
The mediator begins with his opening statement which will include:

1. basic information about himself

2. provide the role of a mediator

3. discuss the rules of the mediation sessions and get the parties' commitment to
abide by these rules

4. get the parties' approval to proceed

Parties are each given uninterrupted time to express their statements.  There will be a
series of exchanges between the parties and / or private caucuses with each of the
party.

All information gathered during the mediation sessions shall be kept confidential and
may not be used outside the mediation process.

Step 6: End of A mediation case may end with any of the following:
the mediation
process 1 Successful Mediation:  Parties sign an Agreement where details of
 settlement are enumerated.

2 Failure of mediation:  Parties decide to end the mediation sessions

without an agreement.  The parties may opt to bring the case to other processes such
as conciliation, arbitration or litigation.

Parties are asked to fill out a Mediator's Evaluation Form despite the outcome of the
case.

JDR Under the Guidelines, the JDR procedure is:

procedure
1.  The JDR judge first refers the case to CAM but also pre-sets the JDR conference not
earlier than 45 days from the parties’ first mediation appearance.

First-level courts such as Metropolitan Trial Courts and Regional Trial Courts have 30
days from the first JDR conference to complete the process.  Second-level courts such
as Regional Trial Courts exercising its appellate jurisdiction have 60 days to complete
the process.

In criminal cases where a settlement has been reached on the civil aspect but the
period of payment in accordance with the terms of settlement exceeds one year, the
case may be archived upon motion of the prosecution, with notice to the other party
and with approval by the judge.

2.  The judge to whom the case was assigned by raffle shall be the JDR judge. He shall
preside over the first stage and resolve all incidents or motions filed during this stage. 
If the case is not resolved during JDR, it shall be raffled to another judge for the second
stage.  As a general rule, the JDR judge shall not preside over the trial of the case.  
However, the parties may jointly request in writing that the case be tried by the JDR
judge.
3.  In single-sala courts, the parties may file a joint written motion requesting the court
of origin to conduct the JDR and trial. Otherwise the JDR will be conducted by the judge
of the pair court or, if none, by the judge of the nearest court at the station where the
case was originally filed. The result of the JDR shall be referred to the court of origin for
appropriate action, e.g., approval of the compromise agreement or trial.
4.  In areas where only one court is designated as a family court, the parties may file a
joint written motion requesting the family court to which the case was originally raffled
to conduct the JDR and trial. Otherwise, the JDR shall be conducted by a judge of
another branch through raffle.  If there is another family court in the same area, the
family court to whom the case was originally raffled shall conduct JDR and, if no
settlement is reached, the other family court shall conduct the pre-trial proper and
trial.

5.  In areas where only one court is designated as

commercial/intellectual property/environmental court (“special court”), unless
otherwise agreed upon by the parties, the JDR shall be conducted by another judge
through raffle and not by the judge of the special court. Where there is no settlement,
the judge of the special court shall be the trial judge.  Any incident or motion filed
before the pre-trial stage shall be dealt with by the special court that referred the case
to CAM.
6.  Cases may be referred to JDR even during trial, upon written motion of one or both
parties. The JDR judge may either be (a) another judge through raffle in multiple-sala
courts; or (b) the nearest court (or pair court, if any) regardless of the level of the latter
court in single sala courts.

7.  If the dispute is fully settled, the parties will submit the compromise agreement for
approval by the court.  If there has been compliance, the court shall dismiss the case
upon submission by the parties of a satisfaction of claims or a mutual withdrawal of the
parties’ respective claims and counterclaims.

In case of partial settlement, the compromise may be submitted to the court for
approval and rendition of a judgment upon partial compromise, which may be
immediately enforced by execution.

In criminal cases, if settlement is reached on the civil aspect thereof, the parties shall
submit the compromise agreement for appropriate action by the court.  Action on the
criminal aspect of the case will be determined by the Public Prosecutor, subject to the
appropriate action of the court.
G.R. No. 185758               March 9, 2011

LINDA M. CHAN KENT, represented by ROSITA MANALANG, Petitioner,

vs.
DIONESIO C. MICAREZ, SPOUSES ALVARO E. MICAREZ & PAZ MICAREZ, and THE
REGISTRY OF DEEDS, DAVAO DEL NORTE, Respondents.

Facts

This is petition for review on certiorari.

This petition draws its origin from a complaint for recovery of real property and annulment of title filed
by petitioner, through her younger sister and authorized representative, Rosita Micarez-
Manalang (Manalang), before the RTC. Petitioner is of Filipino descent who became a naturalized
American citizen after marrying an American national in 1981. She is now a permanent resident of the
United States of America (USA). The petitioner claimed that her parents the herein respondents
fraudulently and clandestinely transferred her property to her brother, one of the respondents.

Aware that it was difficult to register a real property under her name, she being married to an American
citizen, she purchased the subject property and registered it under the name of her parents. A deed of
absolute sale was executed between her parents and the owner of the said property. TCT was issued in
the name of her parents. Years later the petitioner learned that the said property was sold by her
parents to her brother. Considering that all the respondents are residents of United States summons
was served upon them through publication. The respondents authorized their counsel to file an answer
and represent them in pre-trial conference with power to enter into compromise agreement. The RTC
ordered the referral of the case to Philippine Mediation Center, however respondents failed to appear
during the schedule. The Court ordered the petitioner to present her evidence ex-parte. However, the
counsel of the respondents clarified that it was the counsel of the petitioner who did not appear during
the scheduled mediation proceedings, the respondents’s counsel further explained that their counsel
had inadvertently affixed his signature on the space provided for the counsel of the plaintiff in the
mediation report.

Issue

Whether or not the dismissal of the case on the ground of the non-appearance of the counsel of the
petitioner during the mediation proceedings proper.

Held

There is no clear demonstration that the absence of petitioner’s representative during mediation
proceedings on March 1, 2008 was intended to perpetuate delay in the litigation of the case. Neither is it
indicative of lack of interest on the part of petitioner to enter into a possible amicable settlement of the
case. Indeed, there are other available remedies to the court a quo under A.M. No. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJA,
apart from immediately ordering the dismissal of the case. If Manalang’s absence upset the intention of
the court a quo to promptly dispose the case, a mere censure or reprimand would have been sufficient
for petitioner’s representative and her counsel so as to be informed of the court’s intolerance of
tardiness and laxity in the observation of its order. By failing to do so and refusing to resuscitate the
case, the RTC impetuously deprived petitioner of the opportunity to recover the land which she
allegedly paid for.

Submitted by:

Geoffrey Rainier O. Cartagena